The Observer, October 12, 2007
Volume XL, Issue 7
Editorial: New security measures should be implemented as soon as possible
Wednesday's school shooting at SuccessTech Academy near downtown Cleveland was yet another jarring example of the unpredictability of violence. Occurring amid a slew of incidents just five months after the Virginia Tech massacre, the shooting is enough to make anyone nervous.
Is the world becoming more dangerous, or are we just becoming more panicked? Complete statistics are hard to come by, but on our campus, the former is true. According to the Campus Services website, there were nine security alerts in 2005; 14 in 2006; and though it's only the middle of October, there have already been 16 in 2007. The same is true on campuses across the country (see Outside the Circle, page two). Apparently, we're not imagining things.
After the Virginia Tech incident on April 16, then-Interim President Eastwood issued the creation of a Special Security Task Force to evaluate campus security, emergency communication procedures, and emergency prevention. The task force produced a report to President Snyder in August and distributed a report to the Faculty Senate in September.
Practically every college and university in the United States evaluated campus security this summer, and it was a good trend to follow. However, while Virginia Tech's student newspaper is reporting on the first test of the campus's new alert system, our campus is still in the dark about what will happen here in the case of an emergency. What if something were to happen tomorrow? What if the perpetrators in Security Alert No. 16 – who on Oct. 3, pointed a handgun out of a car window at five students walking on Ford Road – hadn't just pulled away laughing and yelling? Can one really overreact to an incident of this nature?
USG, for one, is aware of remaining security problems on campus and is doing its best to help solve them. In addition to a lighting tour – in which USG members, alongside security and facilities personnel, checked Northside, Southside, and the Quad for burnt out lights or dim areas – USG also conducted an emergency phone tour. Members found that the receiving phone was analog, which presented a problem when more than one emergency phone tried to call for help. Now, the receiving phone is digital and the system is more operational.
It shouldn't be up to USG to fix problems like this. An analog emergency response system is deplorable, especially on an urban campus claiming to have the best of the best technology. Other campuses have already instituted text messaging alerts and other uses of technology to notify students almost immediately if a situation arises. Even if this sort of response system is in Case's plan, it should be implemented as soon as possible.
Case should be a leader, not a follower, on a critical matter such as campus security. Stalling on the issue puts us all in more danger.
